Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Abdominal electromyography in laboring and non-laboring pregnant women at term and its clinical implications

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To determine the patterns of uterine action potentials in laboring and non-laboring women at term using the non-invasive abdominal electromyography technique.

Methods

One hundred pregnant women at term who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and equally divided into two groups. Group I consisted of 50 women in active labor, while group II included 50 women not in labor. After enrollment, the cardiotocograph was applied to all women. Abdominal electromyographic recording was started and for every burst of action potential, we measured the amplitude, frequency and duration of action potential. The results were tabulated and statistically analyzed.

Results

Both groups were comparable in demographic characteristics. Four patterns of EMG were detected. The amplitude of action potentials was significantly higher in laboring compared to non-laboring women (77.44 ± 11.25 vs 13.71 ± 8.57, P < 0.001). Similar significantly longer durations of electrical bursts were also noted in laboring women (45.94 ± 8.77 vs 7.11 ± 4.68 s, P < 0.001). Specific electromyographic changes were noted in women passing from the non-laboring to laboring state and in women who required oxytocin augmentation during labor.

Conclusion

Abdominal electromyography may help to distinguish between women in true active labor from those who are not. It also may help to identify women who will enter into labor within 24–72 h and those who require augmentation of labor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Maul H, Maner WL, Olson G, Saade GR, Garfield RE (2004) Non-invasive transabdominal uterine electromyography correlates with the strength of intrauterine pressure and is predictive of labor and delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 15:297–301

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. McPheeters ML, Miller WC, Hartmann KE, Savitz DA, Kaufman JS, Garrett JM et al (2005) The epidemiology of threatened preterm labor: a prospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1325–1330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tong WC, Choi CY, Karche S, Holden AV, Zhang H, Taggart MJ (2011) A computational model of the ionic currents, Ca2+ dynamics and action potentials underlying contraction of isolated uterine smooth muscle. PLoS ONE 6(4):e18685

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Devedeux D, Marque C, Mansour S, Germain G, Duchene J (1993) Uterine electromyography: a critical review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169:1636–1652

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Buhimschi C, Garfield RE (1996) Uterine contractility as assessed by the abdominal surface recording of electromyographic activity in rats during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:744–753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Maner WL, Garfield RE, Maul H, Olson G, Saade G (2003) Predicting term and preterm delivery with transabdominal electromyography. Obstet Gynecol 101(6):1254–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Garfield RE, Maul H, Shi L, Maner W, Fihkow C, Olsen G, Saade R (2001) Methods and devices for the management of term and preterm labor. Ann NY Acad Sci 43:203–224

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garfield RE, Saade G, Buhimschi C, Buhimschi I, Shi L, Shi SQ, Chwalisz K (1998) Control and assessment of the uterus and cervix during pregnancy and labour. Human Reprod Update 4(5):673–695

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cunningham FG, MacDonald P, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap LCIII (1993) Conduct of normal labor and delivery. In: William’s obstetrics, 19th edn. Appleton and Lange, Norwalk, p 371–93

  10. Marshall JM (1962) Regulation of activity in uterine smooth muscle. Physiol Rev 42:213–227

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lucovnik M, Kuon RJ, Chambliss LR, Maner WL, Shao-Qing Shi LS, Balducci J, Garfield RE (2011) Use of uterine electromyography to diagnose term and preterm labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(2):150–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Garfield RE, Maner WL (2007) Physiology and electrical activity of uterine contractions. Semin Cell Dev Biol 18(3):289–295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Agarwal N, Suneja A, Arora S, Tandon OP, Sircar S (2004) Role of uterine artery velocimetry using color flow Doppler and electromyography of uterus in prediction of preterm labor. J Obstet Gynecol Res 30(6):402–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Most O, Langer O, Kerner R, David GB, Calderon I (2008) Can myometrial electrical activity identify patients in preterm labor? Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(4):378 e1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Buhimschi C, Boyle MB, Garfield RE (1997) Electrical activity of the human uterus during pregnancy as recorded from the abdominal surface. Obstet Gynecol 90:102–111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Leman H, Marque C, Gondry J (1999) Use of electrohysterogram signal for characterization of contractions during pregnancy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 46:1222–1229

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Marque C, Terrien J, Rihana S, Germain G (2007) Preterm labour detection by use of a biophysical marker: the uterine electrical activity. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 7(Suppl 1):S5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kandil M, Abdel-Sattar M, Abdel-salam S, Saleh S, Khalafallah M (2012) Electromyography may predict the response to tocolysis in preterm labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 160(1):18–21. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.09.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Menofyia University, Shibin Elkom, Menofyia, Egypt

    Mohamed Kandil, Mohamed Emarh & Hamed Ellakwa

Authors
  1. Mohamed Kandil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Emarh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hamed Ellakwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohamed Kandil.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kandil, M., Emarh, M. & Ellakwa, H. Abdominal electromyography in laboring and non-laboring pregnant women at term and its clinical implications. Arch Gynecol Obstet 288, 293–297 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2757-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2757-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation